creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Michelle Malkin
Michelle Malkin
15 Feb 2012
A Tea Party Senate Takeover

The tea party isn't dead. It's just looking down ballot. While fiscal conservatives remain split over the GOP … Read More.

10 Feb 2012
“To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit”

If you aren't creeped out by the No Birth Control Left Behind rhetoric of the White House and Planned Parenthood,… Read More.

8 Feb 2012
Super PAC-Men: Obama Bundlers Gone Wild!

The White House didn't blow a dog whistle for deep-pocketed liberal donors on Monday. No, the administration … Read More.

Who Are You Calling "Extremist"?

Share Comment

Here is one of the loudest messages of the 2009 off-off-year elections: Conservatives in America will no longer let their opponents define them as outside of the mainstream. They will not submit to Democrats. Or to the media. Or to Beltway Republican capitulationists. They will not "rebrand." They will not sit down. They will not shut up.

Just this past weekend, Democratic Rep. Jim Moran attacked the Republican candidates for governor and attorney general in his state of Virginia as the "Taliban ticket."

New York Times columnist Frank Rich decried the right's "Jacobins" and "Stalinists" who he said joined a "putsch" by supporting Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman instead of ACORN-embracing, Big Labor-promoting, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, tax-and-spend Republican Dede Scozzafava in New York's 23rd congressional special election.

And senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett told ABC's "This Week" that the grassroots conservative-vs.-GOP leadership battle over NY-23 showed that the Republican Party leadership was "becoming more and more extreme, and more and more marginalized."

Let's talk "extreme."

Jarrett is the White House official who bragged openly about recruiting disgraced Marxist rabble-rouser Van Jones for the green jobs czar post. She lavished praise on his public career and said she had followed him "for as long as he's been active out in Oakland." In Oakland, Jones was working to dismantle California's juvenile justice system, pitting minorities against police officers and crusading to free death row cop-killer Mumia abu Jamal.

Who are you calling "extreme"?

Jarrett's White House colleague Patrick Gaspard, Obama's political director who intervened in the race to convince Scozzafava to endorse the Democratic candidate Bill Owens after she dropped out, was a top organizer at the militant Local 1199 chapter of the Service Employees International Union and an activist/organizer for the New Party and the Working Families Party — both ACORN/Democratic Socialists of America front groups.

Who are you calling "extreme"?

"It's rather telling," Jarrett sniffed, "when the Republican Party forces out a moderate Republican, and it says, I think, a great deal about where the Republican Party leadership is right now." It's rather telling that the White House persists with this pointless marginalization strategy as Gallup polls show conservatives continuing to outnumber moderates and liberals across America.

As I pointed out in my Oct.

16 column, there was never anything moderate about Scozzafava. There was no fiscal conservatism to balance her social radicalism. It wasn't merely that she was "pro-choice." She was also a proud recipient of a pro-abortion award named after eugenicist Margaret Sanger.

It wasn't merely that she favored higher government spending. It was also that she supported the stimulus, which every single House Republican in office opposed, on top of her support for the union-expanding card-check bill, on top of her ambiguous statements on the energy tax-imposing cap-and-trade bill.

Newt Gingrich, who foolishly stood with Scozzafava until she threw herself under the bus over the weekend, piously invoked Reagan and condemned the extreme "purism" of unruly conservatives who wouldn't keep quiet about Scozzafava's radical-left agenda.

But conservatives are not demanding "purity." They are simply abiding by Reagan's own wise counsel in 1975: "A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers."

The Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee threw upward of $900,000 down the toilet for a candidate whose core views and political alliances undermined conservatism's fundamental beliefs in limited government from Day One. It was a reckless expenditure of the GOP base's hard-earned money and a bitter tuition bill for a teachable moment on the perils of political expediency.

The days when immoderate political operatives and feckless Beltway opportunists could define "moderation" by their own warped yardsticks without pushback are over.

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009). Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Ma'am;... I think it wrong to suggest that republican leadership is responsible for the right radicalization of the republican party... Parties in or out of power have to lean to the center, and govern from the center... If you are on the outs, the center is the group you must gain to win electiions...It is idealism alone that makes any candidate think they will lead the people anywhere that the people do not want to go...In New York state, Dede Scozzofava was trying to govern in the best interest of a diverse community... The right republicans joined up against her to lose her, and lose the party the whole district...That is the power of a small group working in concert, that great things are possible while greater failures are likely ... This is not Nazi Germany where a minority party could end up with the whole shooting match, but the right republicans seem like Nasis... They seem to be saying: walk this way, do as you are told, or get in the gas chamber... America is becoming more of what the South has always been: A place where the vote is not used for any particular purpose, but as an expression of hate... We now vote against candidates... I trust we will vote against loyalty oaths...I trust we will vote against idealistc government that is incapable of managing practical problems... I trust we will not elect ideologues who will use their office as a pulpet to abuse and attack many of those who they should defend...We are a divided society... We were born out of division, and the parties have added to that division... We could live with division, but having so much less to share, and so much less in common, some of us have decided to play winner take all...I want to respect the republicans for running the country into a ditch in pursuit of their ideals... Like most of us, they cannot rationally judge their ideals, or see when they go too far overboard...The voters of New York have tried to hand the right radicals a lesson...Let us see if they can take it to heart, and make the moral argument before trying to steal a seat...Isn't is proper to gain the minds of all the people before trying to lead them???... There are limits to majority rule... No majority has ever been known to delgate the smallest portion of intelligence of insight to their leaders...The best we can hope, is that the majorty represents the general consensus of opinion... The right republicans wish to gain power while cursing the consensus of opinion ...I expect them to fail, and hope they fail because they deserve to fail...Thanks....Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Wed Nov 4, 2009 4:38 AM
It is my opinion that those elitists in both parties who neglect to relate to their constituents shall be cast aside. The American people are simply tired of being told what to do and being ignored when they question the teller.
Comment: #2
Posted by: John C. Davidson
Wed Nov 4, 2009 6:13 AM
I have seen the future and in it the Republicans are moderate middle. About 60% of voters identify themselves as "conservative." Most of what passes for "independent" seems to be the radical middle. They are not interested in either making the government larger or social engineering.

In regard to the media, there is no MSM in Mainstream Media. It is, in fact, MM. The mainstream media is the one that is two and three times more popular, as is FOX NEWS. Therefore, the only thing MSM can be is Marginalised Socialist Media. Conservatives are not people who desire turning the US into a totalitarian government.

They are insterested in having more democratic decision making. That involves listening to and voting with your consitutuents. They are definitely not interested in treating our national credit like a bottomless credit card by poverty pimps.

http://theprogressivecapitalist.blogspot.com/
Comment: #3
Posted by: JohnLloydScharf
Wed Nov 4, 2009 1:28 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Michelle Malkin
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

1 Aug 2007 The Martyrs No One Cares About

24 Jun 2011 The Reckless Folly of the “Undocumented Immigrant”

18 Aug 2010 Obama's Big Labor Ethics Loophole